Your question is useless, immaterial, and not within the scope of the discussion. The national polls were accurate, as you confessed.
The USC/LAT daily tracking poll showed the election shifting toward Trump from the beginning. Of course, every Democrat dismissed it as a flawed poll. Poynter, Vanity Fair and others have admitted he obvious. The polls got the election wrong from beginning to end. The "experts" believed in the Big Blue Wall until it fell on them. “The weeks of soul-searching that are bound to follow were well underway on Wednesday. “Whenever the news media gets surprised by a big story, there follows a round of questioning,” Dean Baquet, the executive editor of The Times, wrote in a note to his staff. “What could we have done better? How did we and other news organizations underestimate the support for such an unusual, even divisive candidate?” THE NEW YORK TIMES, News Outlets Wonder Where the Predictions Went Wrong, Jim Rutenberg, MEDIATOR NOV. 9, 2016. https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/10/...er-where-the-predictions-went-wrong.html?_r=0 Not nearly enough "soul-searching" yet.
The national polls were irrelevant and wrong. Battle ground state polls were relevant and wrong. “The question came in letters. (“To editors and writers of The NYT,” one reader wrote, “you were so wrong for so long. You misled your readers and were blinded by your own journalistic bigotry.”) It came in Facebook posts. (“You were in a bubble and weren’t paying attention to your fellow Americans,” the filmmaker Michael Moore wrote in a post shared more than 100,000 times.) Most ominously, it came in the form of canceled subscriptions, something that will surely be monitored.” THE NEW YORK TIMES, News Outlets Wonder Where the Predictions Went Wrong, Jim Rutenberg, MEDIATOR NOV. 9, 2016. https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/10/...er-where-the-predictions-went-wrong.html?_r=0
Gabbard is the only potentially viable candidate the DP has now, yet the DP establishment is trying to tar and feather her.
So many of the GOP do not know what a "Democratic Party establishment" is or might be. The hard left doe not like either Biden or Gabbard, so the mistake is to expand the hard left into the "DP establishment." It is not.
Since we are talking about national polling there is no reason to ask questions about states, is there.
That’s why we have guns. Civil war 2 would happen really quick if idiots in Washington tried to change how elections work.
A bunch of old guys running around in camo, fighting the police and armed forces? You're going to be dead, fast.
I don't think he's losing his "base"....better known as deplorables. They won't dump him until later when they have some new charlatan who they worship....then he'll be on the sh*t pile like Nixon, The Bushes, McCain, etc. But I do think he's losing people who voted for him or who supported him because they felt they had to and hoped for the best...the writings on the wall now for all sensible people to see....he's a frickin lying wack job con man who's out of his mind and is a complete and utter disgrace to the office of the Presidency and to all of America.
Even the DCCC admits the obvious - almost all political pollsters are "unreliable". “Democrats aren’t ready to prescribe remedies yet, but officials at the national party committees are sending strong signals that they plan to hold pollsters to a higher standard in the upcoming midterm elections. Rep. Ben Ray Luján of New Mexico, who is chairing the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee for the second consecutive election cycle, ruffled feathers last month when he suggested that “unreliable pollsters will not be invited back to the DCCC.” A committee spokeswoman, Meredith Kelly, clarified last month that pollsters’ reliability isn’t just going to be determined by their 2016 results, but also by their willingness to participate in a DCCC-driven effort to test various polling methods. “It’s more about unreliable data combined with an unwillingness to do better and to learn from that,” said Kelly, the DCCC’s communications director. “That’s when we’ll stop working with people.” POLITICO, Democrats burned by polling blind spot, By STEVEN SHEPARD 03/27/17. http://www.politico.com/story/2017/03/democrats-trump-polling-236560
Correct, like Sanders, Gabbard will not be permitted to win the nomination. Nevertheless, so far, she is the only viable DP candidate who might put a dent in trump. The rest of them are simply unelectable. Does the DP intend to concede the next election?
I strongly disagree that any of the others are "unelectable". Of course, many people thought Trump was "unelectable". So there's that.
I don't know why you say this. The polls show several of the Democratic candidates handily beating Trump. Trump is unelectable given his awful behavior and his lackluster achievements. He serves an angry, outspoken minority while inflaming bigotry and regularly spurning and spiting everyone else.
The anti-Dem candidate individuals obviously have no idea about what they are talking. Trump was down to Biden in PA, MI, WI, IA, OH, NC, and even down in Texas. These are states that Trump won.
From realclearpolitics.com Biden leads Trump by 8 to 12 in MI Biden leads Trump by 6 in IA Biden leads Trump by 8 to 12 in NC Biden leads Trump by 8 in OH Biden leads Trump by 3 in Texas Biden leads Trump by 10 in PA Biden leads Trump by 3 in FL
Some of the "moderates" might have a shot if they could get past the primaries. That is probably impossible.
I know that is how you see Trump, but he is actually far stronger politically now than when he was unelectable in 2015/16. "Donald J. Trump doesn’t always seem like a candidate focused on expanding his base of support. He may have done so anyway. The share of Americans who say they have a favorable view of him has increased significantly since the 2016 election. And over the last few months, some of the highest-quality public opinion polls, though not all, showed the president’s job approval rating — a different measure from personal favorability — had inched up to essentially match the highest level of his term." THE NEW YORK TIME, Don’t Assume Trump’s Approval Rating Can’t Climb Higher. It Already Has. Millions of Americans who did not like the president in 2016 now say they do., By Nate Cohn, Aug. 7, 2019. This may not be a close election unless the DP comes up with some new proposals for voters to start reviewing very soon.
It then goes on to say: The increase in his support since 2016, and the possibility that it continues to move higher, does not necessarily make him a favorite to win re-election. His job approval ratings remain well beneath 50 percent, and have never eclipsed it. But the rise has some important implications in how to view his re-election prospects. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/07/upshot/trump-approval-rating-rise.html
It always depends who the nominees are, but Trump's relentless unpopularity, national Trump fatigue, his especially alienating well-educated, suburban Republican women, and the electorate's ever-increasing diversity seriously diminish the likelihood of his being re-elected. The unprecedented 10+ years of economic growth is coming to an end, and his dependence upon cultural issues can only increase the zealotry of his incorrigible base, but not its numbers. Most Americans prefer a normal person. Of the 56,672 citizens of Greenland, it was estimated that there may be between 2 and 8 African-Greenlanders, all living in Nuuk.